At the Oval Room last night (across the WH), for old times sake I attended the super-K-street consultant meeting. David A. called in from Chicago HQ. The word was that the DNC convention has a hidden bounce that the GOP does not know. (Ask NYT's Nate Silver, and he will know.) The correct poll is that Obama is 51%, at least 7 points above Romney.

If I were in the GOP, I would be scared, really scared. It is good that Eastwood is featured in the news, but it did not make the difference. Gov. from MI speech )(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKux363Dg64) is gotten all excited. So many people will come to vote and so Romney is lost.

Mine will be the Republican elite chose their "inevitable" candidate and the rest went along - like zombies - basically, they "screwed the pooch," because they stopped being true to themselves or the needs of the country.

I'm in the same boat kentuckyliz. Just had my yearly scan yesterday, and I'll know in a few days if the battle is on again. 11 years of fighting for life with expensive treatments under different insurance companies and plans, and I've never had a hitch. Never a denial or even a delay in getting anything I ever needed, regardless of cost. I paid to play, and they have been incredibly good losers. It would be hard for me to come up with any reasonable way it could have been better.

Hard to believe Althouse cons could hate/loathe Obama more than they already do. Again, Obama winning is the best case scenario for this blog ie (4) more years of cons whining = more blog hits for Althouse lol.

Lots of people falsely claimed they would move to Canada if Bush won reelection in 2004. My only resolve is to learn Spanish, because I'll probably have to retire to Ecuador if I want decent health care when I get older.

Shiloh wrote:Hard to believe Althouse cons could hate/loathe Obama more than they already do. Again, Obama winning is the best case scenario for this blog ie (4) more years of cons whining = more blog hits for Althouse lol.

How many movies came out about a fictional shooting of the president? To look for hate you should serioulsy go back to the Bush years. Seriously. Having any lefty talk about hating a president is beyond absurd and bordering on caricature. You might want to have your side look in the mirror. I don't HATE Obama. I just think he's incompetent and has terrible policies that will keep us in the doldrums for 4 more years. Which is more than reason enough to get rid of him.

Crack wrote;Mine will be the Republican elite chose their "inevitable" candidate and the rest went along - like zombies - basically, they "screwed the pooch," because they stopped being true to themselves or the needs of the country.

They shouldn't have tried to manufacture reality,...

Crack isn't one to talk about manufacturing reality. He's turned his cult obsessions into derangements you wouldn't find from most cult members.

They're running these ads with Bill Clinton in Pennsylvania. See, the Republican plan for fixing the economy is give tax cuts to the rich. Obama, however, has a genius economic plan based on "smart investments in technology" that will produce the strongest middle class in the history of the world or something.

Why hasn't Obama already implemented this genius economic plan, given that he's been in office for 4 years now? Who knows! But Obama has a brillliant plan up his sleeve, Clinton assures us of this. You can trust Bill on these matters.

And if this poll results lasts a week or more, then I'll be slightly worried. As it is we are right back to where we were pre-convention. The President can't break 50% and Romney is within a point or two.

The left should get a further bounce from weekend polls, which have usually (and oddly) provided more favorable results than weekday polls for leftists. However this may be tempered by the President's crappy speech and the piss poor jobs report (which this poll didn't take into account).

Running Obama ads in PA appears to be moot, since mittens has given up on PA/MI/WI ... except it may affect down ballot races.

Indeed, Reps are probably worried how train wrecks, ad nauseam liars mittens/Ryan will effect House and Senate races. Again mittens inspires no one, so the con billionaire $$$ changers will have to step in to create an astro-turf/artificial con GOTV.

1) I don't think anyone hates Obama. Many of us hate the things he has done as POTUS, but there's nothing personal about it, I don't like him, but that's not hate.

2) if Obama wins, my "narrative" is that too many people decided they could have a better life by becoming big government cronies and/or slaves.

It is their choice, of course.

It would suck that their choice would eliminate my choice to live free, but that's life, sometimes.

I would probably step up my arguments for freedom, so that when the liberal policies drive us to bankruptcy, it will b e clear to more people what the cause was...blaming it on the Tea Party will be rife, but that's loser talk.

A return question:Do you think there will be more whining by the left if Obama wins, or Obama loses?

I think there would be more if he wins, based on all the whining about GOP obstructionism and the Tea Party over the last two years..l

It was just before the left claimed he blew up the WTC and drowned black people for fun. And right after they claimed he stole the election, although before they demanded that the UN monitor our elections.

If Shiloh were to follow your advice, most everything he writes would have to come with the /sarc tag. He has a hard time modulating his comments. It's all "sarc" all the time. Next step could be self-loathing ala Titus.

I hope not as I think Shiloh has much to contribute to the conversation.

Obama been pretty steady at Intrade for the last month in the 57-58% range.

If Romney is going to win this, he'll have to do it in the debates. That's possible, but not likely.

Good news for the GOP is that if they lose Ryan becomes the new face of the party. Not as pretty as Palin's was, but a lot more substance and with a better chance of getting independent voters and the younger libertarian leaning voters that Ron Paul was exciting.

Crack for example keeps citing Mormons abusing kids. Does he have some personal knowledge of Romney being part of that abuse of kids?We all know that the Catholic Church has had a problem with kids getting molested. Would he argue that JFK should never have been elected because he was a Catholic and Catholics diddle little kids?

Sheridan--you are right, of course--but I was genuinely interested in his McConnell comment, as Mr Obama has stated as one of his goals if reelected, "reforming the filibuster system." I rather thought Shiloh might have had a real point.

The RAS numbers for Obama have been running in the same channel for a couple of years. He's now back at the top of that channel. Furthermore, Obama and Romney have been playing swings and roundabouts for months.

It's discouraging to both sides, I imagine, that neither candidate is breaking out and the race remains close. John Hinderaker at Powerline worries:

On paper, given Obama’s record, this election should be a cakewalk for the Republicans. Why isn’t it? I am afraid the answer may be that the country is closer to the point of no return than most of us believed. With over 100 million Americans receiving federal welfare benefits, millions more going on Social Security disability, and many millions on top of that living on entitlement programs–not to mention enormous numbers of public employees–we may have gotten to the point where the government economy is more important, in the short term, than the real economy.

Could be. The election is closer than it should be, but I still feel optimistic. I believe Americans want jobs more than entitlements, and enough of them are smart enough to see that Obama is out of ideas aside from wealth redistribution and green energy unicorns.

As a rule, I don't reply to childish baiting. hmm, who could I be talkin' about?

I'm obviously more macro than micro as again, presidential politics is not rocket science. This election is looking more and more like 2004 and 1948 when Truman ran against the do nothing congress. Except that Rep congress didn't spend its time restricting women's/minority rights

Bottom line, as much as Rasmussen tries, any way one looks at it the electoral map does not look good for mittens.

I think that Romney will be a lot more competent, and boring, than Crack thinks... which is a good thing.

I'm not really worried about him, per se, but his cult and what he'll, either, allow them to get away with or assist them in getting away with. As I've said before, there's a potential constitutional crisis attached to that man because - seriously - he's not a man.

My prediction-- take heed everyone-- is that the polls will continue to show a 1%-2% divide with Obama in the lead right up to voting day. Romney will win by 3%-4%, "unexpectedly". Think "DEWEY WINS!". Media bias, polls favoring "adults" instead of "likely voters", absurd oversampling of Democrats, the Bradley effect, all will tip the polling toward Obama, but the only polling that counts will be on November 6th.

Sheridan and Shiloh--nor was I being sarcastic--Shiloh raised what seemed to me to be an interesting point about the republican senate leader--I had rather hoped he might follow up with some substance. Normally I ignore shiloh, but as Sheridan noted, sometimes he has some good points. Let the record show, Shiloh, that I tried to engage you in a dialogue in good faith and you declined.

1) Mourn for the loss of my country as I know it. As Insty likes to point out "Something that can't go on forever won't". This fiscal train of ours is heading straight for the cliff and there is one last switch in the track to divert it. If we fly past it the die will be cast. Future elections won't matter because the damage will be too great, and after 4 more years of socializing the electorate, people will be to dependent on the government teat to pull themselves off.

2)Step up my preparations to live off the grid. Not by choice mind you, but with economic chaos comes social chaos. The "grid" won't last long under those conditions.

In the long term, it's better for conservatives if Obama wins, but I don't think the nation can afford that lesson. I can't think of anything worse for the economy than the psychological malaise of 4 more years of this fecklessness.

There will be a little bump here and there, but in 4 years we will be no better off and will have lost 8 years of opportunity. The biggest problem is it won't settle anything either, because the Repubs will hold congress and thus give the Dems someone to blame, and people will probably fall for it like they are right now with the McConnell thing. I heard a number of people yesterday in my circle using that as proof that Obama's failure is not his fault. One man's comment excuses four years of failure. That's just stupid.

I suspect that the "debates" will decide nothing. The faithful on both sides will side with their preformed opinions. Now the debates are a great source of ad revenue for networks, and they keep the pundits in business doing their pundit thing. I still believe the economy will be the tipping point--higher food prices, higher gas prices, continued unemployment. But, as others have noted, we will find out on November 7

So Paul Ryan is going to lose to a man known by both sides of the aisle as "Slow" Joe Biden? The same Paul Ryan who humiliated the current President because he understood basic math?

I can at least contemplate the possibility that Obama could "win" his debates based upon his love of straw-men and hyperbole, as well as an eager to please media proclaiming him the greatest orator since Abe Lincoln (which they've already done on numerous occasions).

I think the debates can be very important if they are forward focused. Obama will make the case of why his "plan" will work with a little more time (golf). Romney will lay out his plan. People know things are broken, and they want to know what's gonna be done, so they will be listening. A lot of independents can be moved by the better argument about how to go forward.

All statements from Barack Obama come with an expiration date. All of them.But this is ridiculous.Only ONE DAY after saying this at the convention:And I will — I will never turn Medicare into a voucher.No American should ever have to spend their golden years at the mercy of insurance companies. They should retire with the care and the dignity they have earned. Yes, we will reform and strengthen Medicare for the long haul, but we’ll do it by reducing the cost of health care, not by asking seniors to pay thousands of dollars more. And we will keep the promise of Social Security by taking the responsible steps to strengthen it, not by turning it over to Wall Street.This comes out:But back in Washington, his Health and Human Services Department is launching a pilot program that would shift up to 2 million of the poorest and most-vulnerable seniors out of the federal Medicare program and into private health insurance plans overseen by the states.The administration has accepted applications from 18 states to participate in the program, which would give states money to purchase managed-care plans for people who are either disabled or poor enough to qualify for both Medicare and Medicaid. HHS approved the first state plan, one for Massachusetts, last month.

Now I'm not saying that this plan is a good or bad plan. I"m just talking about Obama's rhetoric versus the reality.

I do agree with Crack--whatever happens on the night of November 6 will keep the poison alive. It will be no night for celebration, because we will continue to see a polarized electorate. With all of the vitriol already displayed and in full view.

"2)Step up my preparations to live off the grid. Not by choice mind you, but with economic chaos comes social chaos. The "grid" won't last long under those conditions.

I understand your concern and I respect your proposed solution to the "economic chaos" you describe. But most people will not be able to live "off the grid". Folks in major urban centers will not even be able to move away. And not everyone has family "in the country".

Even if I had trust in my local governments (city, county, state)- and I don't - true economic chaos will sweep all before it. What does the central government (what we knew as "federal") do to us and/or for us then? And what happens to the border states? Must all break down, everywhere?

--But back in Washington, his Health and Human Services Department is launching a pilot program that would shift up to 2 million of the poorest and most-vulnerable seniors out of the federal Medicare program and into private health insurance plans overseen by the states.--

Obamacare decrees over the age of 75, you can't spend your own money on your healthcare, doesn't it?

Insty today:

Free-market economists have long known that “controls breed controls.” In health care, leading Obamacare supporters are now proposing unprecedented new government controls over all medical spending — private as well as public — to “solve” problems caused by prior controls. Welcome to ObamaCare 2.0.

In a recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), several prominent Obamacare supporters have called for a binding “global spending target for both public and private payers.” In regular English, this means a government-enforced cap on how much Americans may spend in aggregate on their health care, both public and private. The co-authors of this article include former Obama administration officials Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel (former White House health care advisor and brother of Rahm Emanuel, former White House chief of staff), Dr. Donald Berwick (former head of Medicare), and Peter Orszag (former budget director).

The authors argue that current Obamacare cost controls do not go far enough. Although Obamacare will reduce government-sector health spending (e.g., Medicare and Medicaid), insurers and medical providers will simply shift those costs onto the private sector. To properly control health care costs (they claim), the government must therefore also control private health spending....

Shiloh, my friend--I dont pay much attention to your posts, nor do I monitor your posting record. They are of little concern to me. You made, what seemed to me an interesting observation re the Senate Minority Leader. I would be genuinely interested in your views. I asked for explication, and you respond with a total lack of substance. But carry on--no bravo zulu for you, sir.

The biggest problem is it won't settle anything either, because the Repubs will hold congress and thus give the Dems someone to blame, and people will probably fall for it like they are right now with the McConnell thing. I heard a number of people yesterday in my circle using that as proof that Obama's failure is not his fault. One man's comment excuses four years of failure. That's just stupid.

Yeah, Bag! How dare he do that! He should have instead taken responsibility for not having banished and exiled them like the kind of monarchical leader that Republicans wish for would have done!

The people in your "circle" -- whatever that means (Google?) -- happen to be correct. It really sucks that you can't wish it so, but it is so.

Obama winning is getting scarier and scarier. He has repeatedly indicated that he will finish what he couldn't before. Plus, with no viable plan, whatsoever, for reducing the borrowing, national debt is likely to be in the $20 trillion range by the time he leaves office.

As a baby boomer, expecting Medicare in several more years, we should be reminded that some $716 was taken from it to fund ObamaCare, another unwanted, unfunded, mandate, at a time when we can't afford the one we have. And, the Dems expected that they could make up that $716 billion hole through Death Panels and cutting reimbursement rates, which is just going to drive many more health care providers away from treating us. Scary stuff, esp. for the "me" generation, who are set to find that their promised benefits are gone.

But, we can also expect to see further reductions in domestic oil/gas/coal/nuclear energy production, with the EPA effectively implementing something akin to Cap and Trade.

And, with Chicago-style crony capitalism and politics hitting stratospheric heights under the first Obama Administration, it too is likely to explode in a second term, increasing the pressure on those who try to play the game fairly.

Finally throw in that the takers are likely to finally exceed the makers in another term, and are probably there already if you include government workers in the takers class. The plan, by the dems, is obviously to make this happen as quickly as possible, as that is their only route to long term power.

With all that, I would not expect to see all that much armed insurrection in the second term. But, a distinct increase in sporadic instances. Plus, a lot more work is going to go under the table. I would expect that a significantly higher number of those not working for employers to start hiding their income. Something like what we see in Greece today. And, yes, I would expect the Tea Party to go mainstream.

Ok Paco. I've heard of that but I've never heard of someone using it as something that occurs on one day (i.e. "yesterday"). Usually when people hang out it's not inclusive of everyone they know. Unless they're at a Rotary Club meeting, the lodge or a country club.

At the BBQ with the super-K-street gang. Later heading to the bar across the WH: Off-The-Record. Nate S. from NYT to visit and David A. from Chicago HQ to call in. We show the bounce (it was 46, now 49, and it will be 51 by Sun. PM) will keep on growing.

Another thing Truman had going for him was he was president when a little thing called WWII ended. hmm, who ended Bush's misbegotten/unnecessary Iraq War. And who terminated bin Laden w/extreme prejudice!

Again, presidential politics is not that complicated, plus nobody likes mittens lol and negative carpet bombing ads will make voters like him less, if possible.

Crack, you use the "zombies" comment a lot, and I don't think it's fair.

The reality is that we had a slate of candidates in the primaries. Each of which took the lead, then showed a major weakness, the caused them to fall quickly behind. Some were surprises, some like Newt were just us remembering the weasel he always has been, albeit a weasel with occasionally very good ideas.

Romney won because of his sheer competence in not being terrible.

Is that enough? Well, he has run a good and aggressive campaign so far, so that's a plus. He has experience on the precise topic that is the number one concern in most of America.

And, at the end of the primaries, he is the one we are left with. So, we can look and hope for the best, or we can dwell in the worst. Given that Romney represents not only Mormons but also a conservative Congress, conservative judges, and a rebuff of the policies of the last number of years, those of us who are supporting Romney are doing it balancing the apparent risks and benefits.

Single issue voters, on the other hand, are much more like zombies, yelling "Brainssss!" at every turn.

"My circle yesterday" was about 10 hang glider pilots in a circle with beer about evenly divided group of left, right, and libertarian. The lefties just refused to blame Obama for anything bad. There is always a Republican behind every problem he has.

Ritmo, sometimes a "circle" is just a circle, but unlike yours, we keep our pants on.

Tyrone Slothrop said...My prediction-- take heed everyone-- is that the polls will continue to show a 1%-2% divide with Obama in the lead right up to voting day. Romney will win by 3%-4%, "unexpectedly". Think "DEWEY WINS!". Media bias, polls favoring "adults" instead of "likely voters", absurd oversampling of Democrats, the Bradley effect, all will tip the polling toward Obama, but the only polling that counts will be on November 6th.

I see your read and mostly agree with it.With a couple of caveats.With only 60 days left, the common perception is everything is now static except for the ALL IMPORTANT DEBATES (as the media likes to frame them).

But there will be two more jobs reports. The price of food and gasoline may substantially increase.China may have less money to lend Obama than thought. The crisis Greece, Spain, Ireland, Italy are in is not over spending money...but the lenders deciding to hold back more good money going in after bad loans. The situation will not be static, but dynamic as taxes in the future and all the cuts come closer to happening in voters minds.

New issues like "regional equity" a nicer way of saying Obamaesque wealth redistribution...may come up.

You have broke states like Cali eyeing the "surplus wealth" of Wisconsin that new fed taxes could transfer from the non-needy to the deserving Californians.

You have broke cities like Chicago screaming that the cities declined because the rich people went to lower taxed suburbs...and fairness dictates all the suburbs and cities going to a common tax, school, and "sharing resources" Obama-led restructuing.

And lets not rule out a international surprise like Obama announcing he just bombed Iran. And all the Isreal 1st Religious Righters would have no choice but to praise their Commander in Chief acting on Neocon urgings.

The SEALS killed him (after Clinton allowed him to get away), and then later complained in a fairly outspoken manner (for special forces) when Obama tried to take credit. Incidentally the team that killed him was decried by your fellow leftists as Dick Cheney's "Private Death Squad" just a few years earlier.

And Bush was the one who came up with the plan which was then instituted that drew down forces in Iraq. Obama followed that plan to the letter.

shiloh said...Another thing Truman had going for him was he was president when a little thing called WWII ended. hmm, who ended Bush's misbegotten/unnecessary Iraq War. And who terminated bin Laden w/extreme prejudice!

Nixon ended a war. He also didn't dither on an even riskier decision to give Apollo 11 the go-ahead. (Something that JFK and LBJ talked about...but failed to do!!! Unlike Nixon, who personally led the Moon Mission as C-i-C!!)

Didn't stop Nixon from being booted. Even after a 49 State landslide, biggest ever, (though LBJ wiping the floor with umpopular extremist right-winger got a bigger popular vote.)

It hard to get exercised over these polls. All I know is what I see with my own eyes in Northern California. $4.12 + in gas, $3.52 for a gallon of milk that used to cost $3.39 an close to NO Obama bumper stickers every where I go, including Berkeley. I think Mittens will be doing fine in November.

Unless Obama is voted out of office then there will be No Economic Growth FOR YOU!!

9/8/12 12:38 PM

Or for you. That is if you aren't some government slug.Then again, you probably are which explains your rants. But fear not, eventually foreigners and others will tire of buying T Bills at which point the government comes to a screeching halt and you to will be part of the permanently unemployed. Think Greece.

Garage, please loose that avatar, that is one ugly....anyhow better recalibrate your crystal ball, it wasn't so accurate all the long ago when you were advising us how your Governor Walker was going to get beaten like a rented mule in the recall election.

Chuck66 unfortunately you might be right. Those that believe that are certainly going to vote for Obama if they actually go out and vote. Still since those same clowns believed him for years ago that Obama was going to pay for their mortgages and give them free gas from his stash and he hasn't delivered on that they may well stay home. He had the perfect storm going for him four years ago, not so this time.

It hard to get exercised over these polls. All I know is what I see with my own eyes in Northern California. $4.12 + in gas, $3.52 for a gallon of milk that used to cost $3.39 an close to NO Obama bumper stickers every where I go, including Berkeley. I think Mittens will be doing fine in November.

That's something that's weird this time around:

I'm in fucking UTAH and I've seen hardly any Romney stickers.

Remember last time, when people were getting into fist fights over lawn signs?

"I understand your concern and I respect your proposed solution to the "economic chaos" you describe. But most people will not be able to live "off the grid". Folks in major urban centers will not even be able to move away."

This is, unfortunately, very true. It saddens me deeply. However it is important to note that it is the "urban" voter blocks that have put us in this potential pickle in the first place . They remind me of the "flappers" partying Oct. 28, 1929 like there was no tomorrow...there wasn't. The difference then is that the the nation was still mostly small farms and we were able to survive an economic collapse. It isn't now and I fear it won't.

To be clear I'm not betting on chaos, just that I want to have a "plan B".

I am in western Wisconsin this weekend. Out driving around this morning and heard a couple of commercials on a Twin Cities radio station encouraging people to apply for SNAP benifits. They said you may be entitled to free food courtsey of the government. Welcome to Obama's America.

I think, too, that part of my reticence to talk about the religious issue is that I pretty much think most everyone is wrong on minor or major points. The reality of studying a topic intensely is that opinions form, so that if I were to stay in the mode of criticism, of seeing the worst in people, that's where I'd live my life.

Big reason why I didn't pursue being a police officer, actually, when I had the chance. Didn't want to live a life where my job was to expect the worst and see the worst of people.

So, no doubt, I could do better, but I'd risk my own soul/peace in the process. And politics just isn't worth it. I have different areas where I stand alone with a prophetic voice--it's too much to have every topic be a place of alienation.

shiloh said...Another thing Truman had going for him was he was president when a little thing called WWII ended. hmm, who ended Bush's misbegotten/unnecessary Iraq War. And who terminated bin Laden w/extreme prejudice!

Again, presidential politics is not that complicated, plus nobody likes mittens lol and negative carpet bombing ads will make voters like him less, if possible.

9/8/12 12:47 PM

Pannetta forced him to do it after blowing several prior opportunities. And by the way, they did it using Bush's policies, not what Obama said he would no longer do when campaigning in 08. Nobody has to like Mittens, we aren't electing a class president, just the nation's CEO. And Obama isn't exactly loved or even especially well liked by half the country.

Also Bush ended Iraq in 08 when he signed the Status Of Forces Agreement. The US doesn't sign those agreements with nations it has militarily occupied. I know this may be a stretch for you to comprehend. All Zero did was follow the time table. And as it is he mucked that up as well. As for Binny, Truman didn't kill Hitler, Mussolini and Hirohito, so as per your comment he failed. And just how well did the democrat war in SE Asia turn out, not very well thanks to to democrats snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory.

...“Sure, about a third of it is politics,” said a Maryland salesman, who also didn't want to be named. “But the majority are people concerned about safety. They are worried about crime and looking at the economy and no one having jobs. They want to be protected now. So they’re buying.”

"The biggest new group of buyers now are senior citizens," Larry Hyatt, owner of a North Carolina gun shop, said on CNBC's "Closing Bell." "Ten thousand Baby Boomers a day are turning 65; they can't run, they can't fight, they got to shoot...."

Hopefully some epic gridlock is in store. One good reason to hope the GOP doesn't get too wiped out down ballot. The Tea Party saved 1 or 2 Grand Bargains from Obama with their intransigence. They should have taken the deals, but thankfully they didn't.

Bad jobs report? It won't help - but Romney/Ryan are a disaster - Wait until the debates when Romney has to dance around implementing the trial program for Obamacare AND being "for it" as a national program before he was "against it". Or explaining his belief that there's no difference between the "military" and the "troops." Hmmmm.... sort of sounds like "corporations are people" doesn't it?

Obviously the right-wingers need to focus on the presidency because the Congress is incapable of doing anything! Just look at all that the Tea Party hasn't accomplished. The presidency is the only branch of government that is capable of doing ANYTHING!

Hopefully this means that they wouldn't mind losing both the House and Senate.

If this goes badly for the Republicans - they can thank Grover Norquist and the Tea Party for giving Clinton the opportunity to attack them for not understanding "ARITHMETIC". Put out enough crazies who don't understand things like evolution, female biology, climate science, fiscal vs. monetary policy, etc. and candidates who won't let "fact checkers" stop them from lying - and eventually the electorate catches on.

How many people on this blog repeat Palin's nonsense about Obama being the empty suit reading the teleprompter? Don't you get it? SHE was the empty one. Obama has his faults but one is not lack of intellect.

But - go ahead - call me an idiot while you keep on diggin' yourself into a deeper hole.

shiloh said...Noting cons usual irrelevant deflections in this thread ie Clinton and even going back to Nixon/LBJ lol one glaring Rep negative:

The incompetent/inept/corrupt (8) years of Cheney/Bush wasn't that long ago, eh. Indeed, their legacy looms large, god love 'em.

9/8/12 1:47 PM

Who wouldn't trade today Bush's deficits for Obama's and Bush's unemployment and growth rates for Obama's? Corruption? You have got to be kidding. Bush was a choir boy compared to the is branch office of the Chicago Outfit. Put down the Jim Jones Kool Aid while you still can. Dave, you too.

O Ritmo Segundo said...“We left him a total mess. He hasn’t cleaned it up fast enough. So fire him and put us back in.”

9/8/12 2:43 PM

Even if one were to buy your line of bullshit the answer is still yes, because we are capable of learning from our mistakes whereas those other idiots can't learn from theirs. Ahh the left. Still stuck on stupid for nearly two hundred years.

Even if one were to buy your line of bullshit the answer is still yes, because we are capable of learning from our mistakes whereas those other idiots can't learn from theirs. Ahh the left. Still stuck on stupid for nearly two hundred years.

Please cite a policy mistake made by the American "left" within the last two hundred years. And who counts as left-wing in 1860? In 1780?

Which party held the reins of government during the decades preceding The Great Depression? During the decades preceding The Great Recession?

No Ritshit, the reason we don't have more engineers, scientists is because your dumbed-down libRUL education has failed the last 2 generations. Instead you focused on teaching them how to hate America and learn Ebonics.

Is it any wonder that the Asians are kicking our ass? They take education seriously. They don't tolerate malcontents in the classroom. To them discipline is #1. Heck they even make their students clean their own classrooms to teach them humility.

Young people must not want jobs. Late night TV hosts and pop-culture icons tell the young who the cool guy is...Older Americans must not mind burdening their grandchildren with a disastrous future filled with debt and economic decline. Also, They clearly don't mind working late in life so they can help pay for Blue-state public employee union early retirement pensions.It’s all about false hope and manipulated emotion. You’re a better person if you support the caring party. Results do NOT matter, just good intensions and knowing that in your heart, you hate Grover Norquest and Sarah Palin and those crazy tax payer “tea party” people who want a smaller more efficient government that actually works on behalf of its citizens.

Is it any wonder that the Asians are kicking our ass? They take education seriously. They don't tolerate malcontents in the classroom. To them discipline is #1. Heck they even make their students clean their own classrooms to teach them humility.

That's how I feel, though (knock on wood) I've been fortunate enough not to have any grave illnesses yet. But Obamacare will be around for me when I do.

Once Obamacare's in, it's permanent. Welcome to UK/ Canada healthcare (or worse). Ironically, Americans (including conservatives) might wish they lived in France then-- because though the French system is IMO not superior to ours pre-Obama (thought that's arguable), it certainly will be if Obama wins (or the GOP doesn't take the senate).

I look upon a second term of Obama with serious dread. And it's not just Obamacare. I think there's an asymmetry between the dread that right and left might (or should) feel at the prospect of the other's electoral victory. Administrations are temporary, 4-8 years. But no matter how much a Romney/Ryan admin might somehow limit or roll back the reach of government, entitlements, etc.; that doesn't in any way prevent their expansion in the future.

But once governmental power and entitlements extend beyond certain points, there's no going back (short of some horrible upheaval/ crisis-- and that's where the debt is leading us). It's irreversible. A second term of Obama may in fact fundamentally transform America.

And that's not to mention the dread of having as inept (yet dangerous) a chief executive as Obama (as documented in books like Klein's and Woodward's) at the helm (in the chair) for 4 more years. Shit is sure to hit the fan (because it always does), who knows what will happen here and internationally, but we know at least this: Obama will be "more flexible" once he's past any elections. And we know how devoted he is to the constitution, respectful of the separation of powers. Who needs to worry about a GOP congress when you can appoint czars and resort to executive orders.

The only way to stop him would be impeachment, and that would be a terrible political crisis, terrible experience for the USA to undergo.

With Obama, I really see the prospect of permanent damage to my country. I'm supporting Romney/ Ryan not because they're "my side" or "my team." What's at stake for me is much more profound than that.

I'm also voting against the motherfluking MSM that propped and props Obama up.